Case 2415447/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Miss C Logan v Innovation First International (UK) Limited — 2022

Case reference: 2415447/2020
Decision date: 11 July 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Phil Allen
Panel members: Ms K Fulton, Mr P Dobson

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss C Logan

Respondent

Innovation First International (UK) Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Miss C Logan was employed by Innovation First International (UK) Limited from 6 June 2014 until 10 September 2020 as an Accounts Administrator and/or Finance. The respondent dismissed her with notice on 28 July 2020. In the pleadings described in this judgment, she alleged unfair dismissal, direct discrimination because of sex and/or pregnancy, harassment related to sex and/or pregnancy, victimisation, and unauthorised deductions from wages. The hearing on 20 June 2022 at Manchester was conducted by CVP before Employment Judge Phil Allen with Ms K Fulton and Mr P Dobson.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The claimant's Rule 37(1)(b) strike-out application was refused. The tribunal held that the respondent's conduct of the proceedings was not unreasonable, that a fair hearing remained possible, and that strike out would not be a proportionate response. This was a procedural ruling only and did not determine the merits of the underlying unfair dismissal, sex/pregnancy discrimination, harassment, victimisation or unlawful deduction claims.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

2 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.

Published on gov.uk under the .

How we got this data

Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.

Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.